In an effort to correct for perceived deficiencies in the No Child Left Behind Act, value-added models were proposed as a way to find out how much students learned in schools and classrooms throughout the school year. What has garnered much controversy regarding the value-added model, however, is the attempt to link pay and tenure to performance. In this article, a theoretical framework is introduced that examines the likely success of using value-added assessments as a pay-for-performance tool. After applying the theory, the author suggests that caution should be used when utilizing value-added assessments to pay teachers for student learning. (Contains 1 figure.)